701
Immersion ruined because of black people? š
(thelemmy.club)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2026
701 points (97.9% liked)
People Twitter
9490 readers
899 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Alright, demonstrate that the demographics are as you assert they are. I've shown you that they're depicted in their arts and culture, both as they depicted outsiders and as they depicted themselves, as well as that they had unremarkable interactions with Ethiopia and beyond.
The link also details the history of using the racial composition of ancient Greece for all manner of racial weirdness that wasn't representative of the Greeks themselves, up to and including Internet race weirdos who get bent out of shape about a black person being depicted in a movie set in the Mediterranean.
At this point you've been given plenty of evidence that there sufficient numbers of dark skinned people that it wasn't remarkable. If you disagree that it would somehow have been remarkable, or that this isn't a perfectly workable definition of "plenty", then show some reason why beyond "well everyone knows".
Hell, demonstrate that there were plenty of white people.
You've shown that Greeks had connection and knew about black people but that wasn't disputed... The claim was that there was "plenty" of black peopleĀ in Ancient Greece. Connections to people being in Ancient Greece aren't the same...
I'm not sure why you are taking the burden of proving someone else's claim but you're now trying to spin that burden to me to prove it the other wat around. That's just silly.
Why not trust the other guy to make their case?
Are you asking me why I have an opinion on something? Because I do. You don't need special reasons to make comments on a forum.
You aren't listening. They depicted black people in the fashion that they depicted Greek people. They didn't find them a weird novelty. The nature of ancient Greek prejudice wouldn't have them depict people as Greek that they didn't consider Greek. That intrinsically says something about the cultural integration, because that's what the Greeks got weird over. If it was uncommon for them to be there they would have mentioned it because they mentioned all manner of uncommon things.
If they were a part of the society, and common enough that it wasn't worth mentioning "...and then the one black guy in Athens showed up...", then it seems clear to me that that's "plenty".
Nothing is being spun. I and others have given you evidence. You haven't and are just making vacuous claims. Why do you have the opinion you do about the skin tone content of ancient Greece? Is it the enlightenment era paintings of Greek philosophers as white as could be? That the paint fell off the statues so now they're just white marble? That all the black people in the pottery are "obviously" artistic choices, but the white people just .... Are?
I'm sure you have a reason for thinking what you do, so what is it?
Neither a conversation nor a debate works by one person demanding evidence, denying it, and then refusing to elaborate In their beliefs.
I don't think just the connections shows that they were a common feature over in Ancient Greece. It shows they were well known about, and no wonder since Greeks had plenty of contacts and even colonies over in sub-Saharan Africa, but not imo that there were plenty inĀ Ancient Greece.
And burden of proof works exactly so that the one making the claim should provide evidence for it. I don't think anything so far has done that, there's just been a lot of off-topic stuff and proving connections and that sort of thing. But them being culturally connected wasn't the claim, there being plenty in Acient Greece was.
I think this is such an emotional topic to some that it is easy to lose focus on the actual topic. But this particular chain has for me been just about that specific claim. You want me to "elaborate on my beliefs"? I don't get it. I just wanted to see what source the other fella maning the claim had. That's allĀ
In a debate or conversation, both parties state beliefs and, if it is a debate, which this appears to be, both parties state sources and/or studies conducted by themselves or others.
It will be hard to prove anything about skin colour of an ancient civilization, especially when the civilization just did not give a fuck about skin colour.
I think they had mixed skin tones (as in a bit of both) if there were white people in Greece. People can and always have been able to move to a different country, and thus, the country will have a bit of a mix.
Ricecake has given plenty of sources. You should also drop a few sources if you want any chance of recovering from this absolute ratio. Please grow up, educate yourself, all civilizations have had multiple skin colours, most just don't give a fuck, and learn how to have a debate and find sources.
Edit:
When starting a debate, you should also have sources to back yourself up, otherwise it's an accusation, not an argument or debate. Please come back when you have sources and learn how to debate.
I hope everyone involved has a day as good as they are.
I'm asked for them to provide a source for their claim, that's all. Noting so far has really shown the claim to be true.
https://lucas.leeds.ac.uk/article/skin-colour-in-ancient-greece/
See my other comment
See my other comment. I think since these two chains just repeat each other it would make sense to continue this on in just one chain. What do you think?